On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Steve Hay <[email protected]> wrote:
> > # Okay, this is the brute-force method of finding out what kind of > > @@ -30,7 +30,6 @@ my %OSTYPES = qw( > > dynixptx Unix > > freebsd Unix > > linux Unix > > - haiku Unix > > hpux Unix > > irix Unix > > darwin Unix > > This patch reverts the latest changes that have been made in blead, > namely: > > http://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commit/df00ff3beeb297b9622f8acbed9c80 > d320c87580<http://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commit/df00ff3beeb297b9622f8acbed9c80d320c87580> > http://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commit/e5c8c22050be81fb2e880f0c7a2fcb > e5496ab5d7<http://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commit/e5c8c22050be81fb2e880f0c7a2fcbe5496ab5d7> > I think the "problem" is that porters are patching M::B in blead instead of in the M::B upstream repository, so as M::B development moves forward, the two sources drift out of sync. The "haiku" line does not appear in the current M::B trunk (which happens to be the same as the 0.31 release). My understanding is that there is discussion of moving more and more modules to a "dual-life" state and so this kind of coordination will need to improve. In this case, I'll see about committing the change into the M::B repository and prepping for an 0.3101 release and nudging Ken to kick it out the door. Going forward, I would suggest that changes be made upstream to M::B and then either a release with the changes should be pulled into blead -- or, worst case, the M::B trunk should be pulled into blead if something can't wait for a new M::B release. -- David
